Whether Congress violated the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause when it deprived servicemembers facing criminal prosecutions of the right to be tried by a panel of fellow servicemembers

With the exception of “summary” courts -martial, which are nonadversarial, non -criminal proceedings, see Middendorf v. Henry , 425 U.S. 25, 42 (1976) , servicemembers facing court -martial had an absolute right, from the Founding through 2018, to be tried by a panel of fellow servicemembers. Indeed, until the post-World War II advent of military judges, the panel was not just part of the court -martial; it was the court martial . Starting in 1968, a servicemember facing a special or general court -martial could request to be tried by a “judge alone.” But since 2019 , Congress and the President have also authorized some special courts martial to proceed b efore a “judge alone” even when the accused objects . See 10 U.S.C. §§ 816(c)(2)(A), 819(b) . These bench trials are not just for petty offenses. As petitioners’ cases demonstrate , they can also include serious misdemeanors and felonies —and civilian crimes as well as military ones . The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) conceded below that “historical tradition weighs in favor of finding a due process right to a pane l” in these cases , Pet. 16a, but nevertheless held that no such right exists . The question presented is : Whether Congress violated the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause when it deprived servicemembers facing criminal prosecution s of the right to be tried by a panel of fellow servicemembers.